Explanation of the Epistle to the Romans

by one of the holy disciples that faith without works is dead. ^A And he adds to these words: "But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered Isaac his son upon the altar?" Do those inspired by the Spirit, therefore, say things contrary to one another? What then do we say to this? When he had reached old age, God of all things promised him a son quite unexpectedly; and He said that his offspring would emulate the innumerable multitude of the stars. But because he reverently esteemed that the One who promised was able to accomplish all things, by this he testified ^B to God and was justified by Him, and received as a reward worthy of such a God-loving frame of mind the forgetting of his ancient offenses. Nevertheless, at certain times God exercised the righteous man, specifically regarding the oracle concerning Isaac; but he was faithful and God-loving even in that, as he preferred nothing to the love of God. However, as the disciple of the Savior says: "Faith was working with his works, and by works faith was perfected." And the admirable Paul himself says somewhere regarding the forefather Abraham: ^C "By faith he offered up Isaac when he was tested, and he who had received the promises offered his only begotten son, of whom it was said, 'In Isaac your seed shall be called,' concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead." Therefore, even if it happens to be said that he was justified by works because he offered up Isaac when tested, nevertheless this reality was a clear demonstration of his most steadfast faith.

V, 5. But not only that, but also glorying in God. ^D Our Lord Jesus Christ, wishing to declare the truly admirable love of God the Father which He showed toward us, brought forward as proof the accomplished work of the Incarnation and the passion of the Cross, saying thus: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life." For He truly gave His own Son for us, and we were therefore redeemed and rescued from death and sin. For the Word did not become flesh and dwell among us for the sake of anything else, but that, having endured death in the flesh, He might triumph over principalities and powers, and might render powerless him who held the dominion of death—that is to say, Satan—and might take away corruption, and banish with it sin which had tyrannized over us, and finally render empty that ancient curse which human nature had incurred at the beginnings of the race, and as it were in the primal root, on account of Adam. For Adam, having violated the commandment...

offended the Creator; and for this reason he became both accursed and subject to death. But the Lord of all again had mercy on those who were utterly lost. ^A For the Son descended from heaven, forgiving sins, justifying the ungodly by faith, and, as God, transforming human nature into incorruptibility and restoring it to what it was from the beginning. For there is a new creation in Christ, since a new root has also been planted. And He became the second Adam; and not, like that one, the cause of wrath and of turning away from the heavenly fatherland for those who have come from Him; rather, He became the agent of reconciliation and the giver of intimacy with God, through sanctification and incorruptibility and through justification by faith. These things the wise Paul explains to us in the present passage.

V, 12. "Therefore, as by one man," he says, "sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned."

For, as I said, because of sin, death entered into the first man and into the beginnings of our race; then it took hold of the whole race in succession. Moreover, the dragon, the inventor of sin, having prevailed against Adam by his wicked ways, opened for himself a path to the mind of man: "For all have turned aside, they are together become unprofitable." ^B Therefore, being turned away from the presence of the most holy God, because the mind of man is diligently inclined to evil from his youth, we lived a senseless life; and death, as conqueror, devoured us, as the prophet says: "Hell has enlarged its soul, and opened its mouth without ceasing." For since we have become imitators of the transgression in Adam, inasmuch as all have sinned, we have incurred the same punishments as he did. But the world has not remained without help; for sin has been blotted out, Satan has been prostrated, and death itself has at last lost its strength.

V, 13. "For until the law sin was in the world."

The law through Moses was, as I said, a reproof of the infirmity of offenders, not an absolution of sin; rather, it even provoked ^C wrath. For it was necessary for those who transgressed to undergo the punishments defined by the law; but where there was any manner of transgression, there also was sin. But if sin brings forth death, it must undoubtedly be said that death, being born of sin, is strengthened along with it; but conversely, when this is removed, that too is weakened, and perishes along with its parent. Therefore, he says, death was in the world until the law. For as long as the law remained, for so long did the charge of transgression prevail against those who fell; but the law being removed, the accusation of transgression likewise ceased. Furthermore, the guilt ceasing, death also, as I said, shall cease. ^D

^A *V, 14. But death reigned from Adam until Moses, etc.* But if this is so, one might ask, how did death rule over those on earth even before the Law? For although some were not guilty of the transgressions of the Law, because the Law had not yet been given, they nonetheless fell into corruption in the likeness of the transgression of Adam. This is as if he were to say, for instance: Since death was spreading in the likeness of Adam, just as a plant which has suffered in its root, there is every necessity for the branches sprung from it to wither. He says that he [Adam] was a type of the one who was to be, that is, of Christ, even though He had already arrived and had completed the mystery of the dispensation in the flesh. How then does he call Him "to be"? One might perhaps ask. For having set before us the first man, and having recalled the times of the transgression, he named Christ the last Adam, as one who was to come after them. For He had been predestined by the will and providence of God and the Father as Savior and Liberator; but He appeared at His own times, as the Sovereign willed. ^B These are the times at the end, as it were, at the sunset of the present age. Having therefore placed the second as a type of the first, he almost questions the listener, and with a certain punctuation of speech and as if questioning, he says what follows.

*V, 15. But not as the transgression, so also is the gift.* For it is as if he were saying: We have been condemned to death through the transgression in Adam, the whole of human nature having suffered this in him, for he was the first-fruits of the generation. But in Christ we have blossomed again into life. And Adam was a type of the future one, that is, of Christ, bringing upon us a grace ^C that matches the wickedness of those who preceded. Does he say, then, have I missed the truth by saying this? Do I wander off the mark? Is it not the case that as is the transgression, so also is the gift? What? Because of one, death was strong, but shall life be weak because of one? Why should it not be said rather: If by the fall of one, the many have died, how much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ abound unto the many? For the Creator, being philanthropic, will by no means allow that while death prevailed on account of one, life should not also gain power on account of the one; ^D on the contrary, grace will surpass the power of wrath.

*V, 16. And not as by one who has sinned, so also is the gift.* He sets the momentum of the matter and the force of the reasoning upon what is becoming to God. For if, he says, the condemnation finds its cause in the one who sinned, the gift...

one, Adam, it passed down to all according to his likeness—for he was, as I said, the root of the race having suffered corruption—how would it not also be acceptable to God and worthy of love, that from one righteous act, the many should be justified from many trespasses? Or is it not more preferable in the eyes of God to save rather than to destroy? As therefore Adam was condemned, and the power of the curse of Moses prevailed, bringing under corruption those upon the earth, so, since Christ, the second Adam, has been justified, then by the same path the justification will certainly also reach us. We say that Christ is justified, not as though he had ever been unjust, or as though he had advanced toward justification through a progress toward better things, but because he was the first and only human on earth who did not commit sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth.

V, 17. *For if by the trespass of the one, death reigned through the one, etc.* Observe again how he defines the justifying grace as being more powerful than the condemning curse. For no one, he says, would say—as is reasonable—that the death occurring through one person could prevail over those on earth, while life would lack the power to do the same. For with much more cause, those who have the grace of Christ and have received the gift of righteousness from the bounty from above, will shake off the power of death and will reign together with Christ, who makes all things alive. ^C

V, 18. *Therefore, as by the trespass of one, into all men unto condemnation, etc.* The divine Paul, as it were, puts the finishing touch on the preceding thoughts, saying: "Therefore, as by the trespass of one," and the rest. For we have been condemned, as I said before, in Adam, and from the first root, the death resulting from the curse passed into every shoot born from it; yet afterwards we have been justified and reborn into life, Christ having been justified for us. For our forefather, having disregarded the commandment given to him, offended God and underwent the effects of divine wrath; for he slipped into corruption. Then sin also laid hold of human nature; and thus the many—that is, those throughout the whole earth—were made sinners.

But someone might say: "Granted that Adam fell and, having disregarded the divine command, was condemned to corruption and death; why does it follow from this that the many were made sinners because of him? How can it be that his fault pertains to us? Or why at all, when we were not yet born, did we undergo condemnation with him, when God has said: ^D 'Fathers shall not die for their children, nor children for their fathers; but the soul that sins, it shall die' (Deut. xxiv, 16)?" What then shall we make of the defense of this dogma? The soul, I say, that sins...

^A actually dies. But we have become sinners through the disobedience of Adam in the following manner: He had been created for incorruption and life, and his life in the paradise of delights was holy; his mind was entirely and always centered on divine visions; his body was in calm and tranquility, with every shameful pleasure quieted—for there was no tumult of irrational impulses within him. But since he fell into sin and slipped into corruption, from that moment, pleasures and impurities rushed into the nature of the flesh, and the law that rages in our members sprang up. Therefore, nature contracted the disease of sin through the disobedience of the one, that is, Adam; and thus the many were constituted sinners, not as having transgressed with Adam (for they did not yet exist), ^B but as being of his nature, which fell under the law of sin. Just as, therefore, human nature became sick in Adam through disobedience, and corruption and passions entered into it, so it has been delivered again in Christ; for He was obedient to God the Father, and did not commit sin.

V, 20. But the law entered in, that the offense might abound.

Someone will perhaps reason in a plausible manner and say: "Adam was a type of the one who was to come; and just as we were constituted sinners in him through the transgression, so we have been justified in Christ through obedience." It was necessary, therefore, he says, for the justification in Christ to shine forth to those on earth with no one intervening. What then was the use ^C or necessity of the laws given through Moses? To such questions, the divine Paul again stands up, as if in opposition, saying: "But the law entered in, that the offense might abound." He said "entered in" (or "supervened") to mean that it was placed in between the condemnation of Adam and the justice of Christ. And whoever might ask again what the need was for this introduction of the law, will clearly hear him saying, "That the offense might abound." What do you say, O Paul? Is the law then the cause of sin, and has the offense been multiplied through it? God forbid. It is necessary, then, to clarify the method of this mystery. David therefore said: "All have turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; ^D there is none that does good, no, not one" (Ps. xiii, 3). For all those on the earth had indeed corrupted their way after the transgression of Adam; and for this reason they were punished, all having undergone the common penalty, the flood, and individually also at times and in countries and cities. For even if the law was not yet, nevertheless, men were instructed by God toward the knowledge of what is right through impulses naturally ingrained. But, being addicted to wretchedness...

God took pity on those on earth, and ^A in His goodness, considered how to deliver them from the sin that tyrannized them in Christ. Indeed, He judged it necessary—and quite correctly so—that those on earth should be shown first as sickly, so that the saving entrance of justice in Christ into the world might appear as timely as possible. For we say that a man is justified, not if he is already righteous, but if he is held in the grip of sins. By what argument, then, had it to be demonstrated that those dwelling on earth were in need of Christ’s grace? The law entered, that sin might increase: that is, that among those under the law, sin might appear in abundance, since clearly no one could be justified because of the weakness of his nature, and all were as if held fast by the charges resulting from transgression. The law, therefore, was established as a kind of reproof for the weakness of all, so that human nature might appear as having obtained the healing that comes through Christ. On this account He says: “But where sin abounded, grace did superabound.” For it had to be of such a nature and extent that it would appear superior to the law that condemns.

VI, 3. Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus, etc.

We have indeed been baptized, clearly, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. And if one says, “We have been baptized into Christ Jesus,” he says nothing incongruous. For, while the specific property of diversity is distinguished by names, and by subsistences, and by differences of persons—in the way, namely, that the Father relates to the Son, and how the Spirit relates to both (for the Father is Father and not Son; and the Son in turn is by nature He who is born of Him and is not the Father; and the Spirit is properly the Holy Spirit)—since the Son is in the Father, and the Father in the Son, and the Holy Spirit exists in both because of the unity of nature, even if one names only one, he ^C signifies the whole Trinity by the power of theological contemplation. Therefore, he who names Christ will not forget the Father nor the Spirit. But since Jesus became man and endured death for the life of all, the blessed Paul necessarily turned to that which was most apt for the doctrine proposed; for it was necessary for him to name the One who suffered. Wherefore he says: “As many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death.” For having first set forth, as it were, the good questioning from a right conscience toward Christ, and having accepted by faith that He died for us and was buried and rose again, we have obtained the remission of sins through Holy Baptism, and by enduring the mortification of sin, and as if dying ^D together with Him who died for our sake, through the putting to death of the members which are upon the earth. For Christ died indeed once to sin; but in that He lives, He lives to God. And we

likewise undergo a death equal to His, and are as it were buried with Him, carrying around His mortification in our own bodies; for we have been buried together with Christ. What then do we gain from this? The Apostle himself reveals it, saying: "That as Christ was raised llbracket A from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." For we must, as those who have been buried with Him, also rise again in a spiritual sense. And if to be buried with Christ is to die to sin, it would be logical to conclude that rising with Him must mean nothing other than living in righteousness. Now, he asserts that Christ was raised by the glory of the Father, not that He lacked power of His own—for He is Himself the Lord of powers—but because it is customary for both Christ and His disciples to ascribe things that are above human nature to the glory of the highest nature. Therefore, even if God and the Father is said to accomplish anything, do we not make the Son a participant in every work performed by Him? For if all things were made llbracket B through the Son, who could doubt that even the resurrection of His own sacred body was accomplished through the Son? And indeed, the Son, showing Himself to be an agent in this, said to the Jews: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." Observe, then, how He promises to raise up His own temple Himself, even though it is said to have been raised by God and the Father. For because He is Himself the life-giving power of God and the Father, He gave life to His own temple.

"If we have been planted together in the likeness of His death," etc. The "likeness of His death" is the death of Christ, because He did not remain in death, but rose again on the third day.

llbracket C [Again, cod. f. 53.] The divine Paul says that those who have been buried with Christ must expect a resurrection similar to His. And the term "planted together" might suggest being conformed to Him and being of the same intellectual species. But this must be carefully considered: Emmanuel laid down His own soul for us, and died in the flesh; and we, as many as have received baptism, have been in a certain manner buried with Him. Is it as if we have experienced the death of the flesh together with Him? By no means. Let us explain, therefore, how we have been "planted together" in the likeness of His death. Christ died in the flesh, that He might loosen the sin of the world; but we die, not indeed at any time to the flesh, but to sin, as it is written, that is, llbracket D by causing sin to be idle and inactive in ourselves through the putting to death of the members which are upon the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness. Thus we have become "planted together" not only with the death of Christ according to the flesh, but also with the likeness of His death. And this is to be understood as dying for sin, though not—

^A nor for His own ^B—which is far from the truth; for God is immaculate and far removed from any capacity to sin—but as I have said, for the sin of the world. For in that He died unto sin, He died once for all. We have therefore been planted together into the likeness of His death; and we shall be altogether planted together in the likeness of His resurrection, for we shall live in Christ. And the flesh will indeed live again, but we shall also live in another way, by dedicating our own soul to Him, being transformed unto holiness and a glorious manner of life in the Holy Spirit.

VI, 6. *Knowing this, that our old man, etc.*

Who our old man is, and what the body of sin is that is destroyed, and in what way it has been crucified with Christ, it is necessary to inquire with some diligence. Perhaps some will imagine that the earthly flesh is called the body of sin, as if it were a punishment joined to the soul, because it had sinned before these bodies. For it pleases some to think and speak thus. ^C Since, however, this is a distinctively pagan opinion, let us cast it away as alien to the truth. Therefore, He calls the earthly body "the body of sin" and "our old man," which, from the antiquity of Adam, has received the necessity of corruption; for in him, as the first, we were condemned. Moreover, it has contracted a study of pleasure as a kind of infirmity; for thus does the flesh naturally behave on account of its innate impulses. How then, therefore, has the man been crucified with Christ? The Only-begotten became man, and was clothed in earthly flesh, which, as I said, being as it were from the antiquity of Adam, was weakened unto death, and, so to speak, was travailing within itself to be sharpened toward sin by innate impulses. ^D The law of sin, however, lay quiet in the holy and most pure flesh of Christ; and we do not say that the more misplaced human passions were stirred in Him, except for those that have an irreproachable movement—I mean hunger, thirst, weariness, and whatever else the law of nature has kept apart from blame even in us. Yet even if the law of sin did not move in Christ, because it was lulled to sleep by the power and operation of the incarnate Word, nevertheless, if the nature of the flesh be considered in itself, even if it were seen in Christ, we shall find it to be no different from our own. We were therefore crucified with Him, His flesh being crucified, which in a certain way contained the whole nature in itself; just as also in Adam, at the time when he fell under the curse, the whole nature contracted the disease of the curse. For thus we are also said to have risen with Christ, and to sit together in the heavenly places. For even if God Emmanuel exceeds our condition, yet because He dwelt among us as one of us, He subsequently rose and sits with God the Father. The old man, therefore, was crucified together with Him; for it has been loosened by the resurrection of that ancient curse [the power of which — see facsimile] has been destroyed; and the body of sin is also destroyed, and...

not indeed the flesh altogether, but the inherent ferocity of the movements within it, which always drags the mind toward baser things, casting it as if into mire and muddy pools with earthly pleasures. For who would doubt that even this has been set right in human nature through Christ, when Paul says clearly: "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." Do you see, then, how the body of sin has been destroyed? For the sting of sin has been condemned in the flesh; and though it was mortified first in Christ, grace has passed from Him and through Him even to us.

^B "Know you not, brethren? for I speak to them that know the law." He declares it to be slippery ground everywhere, if anyone strives to remain under the law; and he urges rather that we should desire, with our whole mind, the grace that comes through faith, that is, justification in Christ, with whom he has asserted that those who have been baptized are buried together, that being dead to sin, they might live to God in righteousness. Therefore, he also said: "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that you should obey the lusts thereof; neither yield you your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for you are not under the law, but under grace." ^C See then how he commands them to depart from the shadow of the law, and rather to seek refuge in the grace that is in Christ. Furthermore, the inspired man was not unaware that some would certainly say, or would deliberate within themselves, that our ancestors had departed from the right way and life; for the law helped them nothing, and the glory of their Hebrew life was somehow empty. For if it is an absurd thing to seek to exist under the law, and yet this was the goal of life for the ancients, how is it not true to say that they had missed the mark of what was proper? ^D He who has Christ within himself struggles, therefore; and he skillfully pretends, at the same time, that he wishes to agree even with those who have lived under the law, but he turns the discourse in various ways, to the effect that one should believe that when the time invites one to faith, one ought not to persist stubbornly in the ancient customs. Hence he says: "Know you not, brethren, for I speak to them that know the law, how that the law has dominion over a man as long as he liveth?" This is a general rule, both regarding every law and those who are under the law. For indeed, for all those who are under the scepter of kings, the laws define what must be done, and what must not; but they have power while they are still living: if, however, any of those who are under the law should depart from this bodily life, they have stripped off with their life the authority of the laws also. For if they have ceased...

^A from sinning, the law will also, in a way, be rendered ineffective regarding them. It is true, therefore, that it exercises authority over a man for as long as he lives.

And it is necessary to say what the aim of these words is. He brings forward two excellent points. For we, he says, who have been buried with Christ through baptism, having died to sin, have passed beyond the authority of the law, having been transformed into another life. But those who lived before the coming of Christ, not yet having endured the death understood in Christ, were still living to sin. ^B Therefore, the law held sway over them as living ones, just as, indeed, a husband does over a wife. For just as a married woman, while her legal husband is alive, does not make her union with another without incurring guilt, but if he should be dead, he says, she will be exempt from punishment, even if she should choose to enter upon a new marriage in a legal form; in the same way, I think, those who have not yet attained the mortification of sin in Christ, but are living, as it were, in it, have naturally been under the law; for it exercises authority over a man for as long as he lives. But those who have already come to be under grace in Christ, through whom they have also died to sin and been put to death ^C to the flesh—that is, to the passions of the flesh—if they are no longer appearing as those living in the world, would make their life outside the law blameless. For they have been put to death, as I said, through the body of Christ, and have died to the law, being justified through faith.

VII, 5. *For when we were in the flesh, the passions of sins, which were through the law, were at work, etc.*

By "flesh" he designates the carnal mind, as he also says elsewhere: "But those who are in the flesh cannot please God." And yet, how is this not true? Since he does not address such things to those who have been initiated by him as being outside it. But it is necessary to examine what he wishes to signify. Since, he says, we were living carnally and were ruled by earthly ^D affections, then the passions of the flesh were at work in us through the law, so as to bear fruit unto death. What then, someone might say, were the passions of the flesh brought in through the law? How then shall we defend the law against such a charge?

What then do we say to this? The passions of the flesh are not stirred up in us by the law, but are rather born from innate pleasure, and they lay hold of the weak mind. And this he makes clear to us by saying: "The flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh; for these are opposed to each other." But now, passing over this, he says that the flesh resists the spirit, setting nothing in between. Therefore, the carnal passions are not moved within us by the law, but rather naturally; and what is more to be wondered at, they are repugnant to the will of the law itself, as Paul says elsewhere: that the carnal mind is enmity toward God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can it be. If, then, the mind of the flesh fights against the law, how is it not insane to think that those things which are so opposed to it are moved by the law itself into action? What then is Paul saying? He is speaking as if to those who have died to sin, and through baptism...

^A have been buried with Christ, and as if they have already obtained the mortification of the passions, to whom it would be fitting that they should depart even outside the bounds of the law, inasmuch as they have been set free from the passions which are condemned by the law.

Therefore, while we were still persisting in the intention of the flesh, the passions which were condemned and named by the law, he says, were active in us; and we were at that time also subject to the law, insofar as sin was still living within us. ^B

Now, however, we have been set free from the law, having died to that by which we were held. For we were subject to the law, he says, because sin had made us its subjects. But if we have died to that by which we were held—that is, to sin—the law will also certainly cease along with it; for it was appointed on account of it, so that it might convict those who transgress. We have therefore become outside the function of the law, we who have died to sin: for we have become another’s, and we must serve Him in newness of Spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

VII, 7. What then shall we say? Is the law sin? Observe how wisely he speaks concerning the law. For he indeed said, “When we were in the flesh, the passions of sins ^C which were through the law were active in our members, to bear fruit unto death.” But the discourse would not lack suspicion. For someone might immediately say to these things: Is the law then the pledge and mediator of sin? For if it is true that through it the passions of the flesh are active in us, why ought we not to understand the law to be the fountain of sin?

What then does the holy teacher do? He meets this sharply, and denies that the law is the parent of sin; rather, he blames human nature, as being weak and having made itself liable to legal punishments through its own infirmity. Therefore he says: “What then shall we say? Is the law sin? By no means; but I did not know sin except through the law.” Observe the vigilant diction. For he did not say, “I did not have sin except through the law,” but he says rather that he did not know it except through the law. The law, therefore, is not the occasion of sin, ^D but rather its demonstrator, making it manifest to those who did not know it; not so that, having learned it, they might perform it—since, even before knowing it, they had in any case committed it; for “there was not any righteous,” according to the voice of the Psalmist:—but so that, having recognized sin, they might turn toward better things.

And it seems to me that something of this sort happened to the ancients through the command of Moses. Let there be proposed to the argument, if you will, a certain wide, smooth road leading to a destination, and let there be scattered in it much gravel throughout the middle, and let pits also be dug there, if one pleases; then let there be some who journey through it in night and darkness, stumbling and very frequently striking against those things lying in the middle, and moreover falling unwittingly into the pits. And as matters are in this state, let someone station a torch at those same crossroads, making it manifest to

^A those who are in the middle, not so that they might again trip over them, but so that they might rather move beyond them and be rid of the evil. Did the light therefore do wrong because it pointed out what causes grief? Or shall we rather say that it worked for them the greatest possible benefit and rendered them more secure? But, I believe, this is evident to no one among existing things. When, therefore, being sinners and tripping into very many charges, we came to know sin through the Law, the Law should not reasonably be thought of as or called sin—far from it—but rather it is a demonstrator of sin, as I said.

VII, 8. For apart from the Law, sin was dead.

If the Law condemning the manner of wickedness had not been established, he says, the evil would have been ineffective; for it gains its strength in a certain way from the Law; and indeed the stimulus of pleasure would be weaker for some if no one forbade it; nay, it is almost blunted if there is a broad license for sinning: for where nothing resists, there the zeal is usually broken. Sin, therefore, is dead, when the Law does not distinguish what is to be done. The mystagogue says that he lived once without the Law; then, upon the arrival of the commandment, sin revived, but he asserts that he himself died; and he shapes the argument in these things around his own person. And I, for my part, believe that he wishes to signify something of this sort: for it is admittedly under judgment to commit a fault even in ignorance; but the punishment will be yet more burdensome for those who know, as the Savior fully assured us, saying: «He who knew the will of his lord and did not do it, shall be beaten with many stripes; but he who did not know, and did not do it, shall be beaten with few.» ^B It is therefore better, admittedly, to commit a fault in ignorance than with a knowledge of the laws. But if, indeed, someone has come under the Law, having once lived a life outside the Law, and then has chosen to disregard what has been decreed, he is caught by the charge of sin and has fallen under judgment. Then indeed, grieving at his own sloth and almost crying out against the exactness of the Law, he says: «I once lived without the Law; but when the commandment came, sin lived, and I died.» For if sin is truly dead without the Law, why is it not plausible to think that sin is, in a way, made alive through the Law, which both makes it manifest and, as it were, forms it into a living thing, even though it was not known before, although it did exist in us? For we were not righteous; but while sin was as if dead, because the condemning Law was not present, we lived, having a seemly pretext of ignorance. «For where there is no law, neither is there transgression,» as he himself says. Thus, the commandment having come into the midst, sin indeed revived, but death was rendered void, and therefore also the judgment of those who fall through weakness into transgressions. And what follows from this? An unexpected thing, beyond expectation, happened to us: «The commandment, though given for the sake of life, turned into death.» And just as to those suffering from an infirmity of the eyes, the solar ^C

be agents of things outside of hope and inadmissible to us. For the commandment, he says, that was given for life, the same is found to be for death. ^A For just as the light of the sun’s ray harms, in a way, those whose vision happens to be weakened, even though by nature it is sweet and desirable, and it is not at all the cause of the injury, but the blame should rather be attributed to the infirmity of those who are affected by it—the fact that they are harmed by it; in the same way, I think, he says that the commandment is given as a pretext to sin, and that he has been deceived by it, and carried down even to death. One might also say, in another sense, that the love of pleasure is always wont to struggle vehemently against the counsels of the Law; and the habits of depravity, being checked by [the Law's] kindnesses, set themselves up more generally, and sometimes plunder the mind, turning it toward transgression, and subjecting it to the punishments from the Law, even though they had the Law as the cause of that war. In this way, then, the wise Paul says that he was deceived by the commandment, and died by it. For it killed [him] by, as it were, whetting the pleasures within us toward resistance, according to the ways mentioned before.

So the Law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. ^B

(Cod. f. 81.) VII, 12. *Itaque lex quidem sancta, praeceptum sanctum justumque et bonum.*

The Law is holy, for it proclaims as holy and just and good those who can keep it, so that they might be in no way liable to charges arising from transgressions. But this was somehow impossible: "For who shall understand his errors?" as it is written.

VII, 13. *Quod ergo bonum est, mihi factum est mors?*

(Cod. f. 82 b.) The commandment is holy. Then how did it say "and the commandment which was for life is found to be to me for death"? Tell me, then, has the good become a cause of destruction? By no means, he says. For in these things I am not at all accusing the Law, but I stand as an accuser of sin. ^C For it so violently forces human nature, and has so mastered the mind within us, that the Law itself, which was given to us for salvation and life—the truly holy and good commandment—becomes a cause of death to those who are subject to it. How or in what way? For if punishment always follows those who sin, and we have been thoroughly driven to this point of weakness, so as to be always falling into transgressions, it is already clear, in a way, that in this manner the saving Law, the holy and the good, seems to become, as it were, sinews for sin and a path to death for those who are under sin. And perhaps, he says, [it is] so that sin may become exceedingly sinful through the commandment. For indeed, punishment will certainly follow those who have been ignorant of what pleases the Master; for they have sinned, even if they did not know it. Yet there remains for them, I think, a not implausible plea of defense: for they will, as is likely, offer their ignorance as an excuse to those who are under the Law, saying that they did not know the Master’s will, even if they were under reproach in some way. Therefore, if one were seen as having chosen to live impiously, the charge will not be one of ignorance, but of madness and, finally, of the highest aversion from God. Thus would he be called ^D a sinner in an extreme degree, a sinner simply…

^A for being ignorant, and not at all one who is to be called or is a sinner by way of excess.

VII, 14. *For we know that the law is spiritual.*

He calls the law spiritual, as it makes those who follow it spiritual. But one who is spiritual is understood as he who does not live according to the flesh, but rather has inclined toward desiring to follow the will of the Spirit. For the blessed David also says: "The law of the Lord is immaculate, converting souls; the testimony of the Lord is faithful, giving wisdom to little ones; the fear of the Lord is holy, abiding for ever and ever." As, therefore, he says that the law is immaculate, because it makes men immaculate; that the testimony is faithful, because it proves them faithful; and the fear is holy, as it renders them holy: so also in this place, consider that the law is said to be spiritual, ^B as it shows those who follow it to be spiritual. For even if it exists in shadows, it nevertheless has the form of truth. What, then, does Paul do? He affirms that the law is spiritual, but he accuses the nature of man, which is very prone to the disease of sin. But he also strives to prove that, because the law is spiritual, for that very reason it is exceedingly burdensome to human nature. For what, tell me, does he say, if the law is indeed spiritual, "but I am carnal," that is, completely oppressed by the affections of the flesh? Do you see how great a conflict of wills he demonstrates to us by his statement? For one thing is the will of the Spirit, and quite another is understood to be that of the flesh; for they ^C fight between themselves, and can never agree to come to a concord. If, therefore, man is carnal, but the law is spiritual, how could this be tolerable to those who are so greatly afflicted by the disease of sin? And it is said very wisely: for if he is carnal, he is understood to be, in a certain way, a captive and established in a servile state.

VII, 15. *For what I perform, I know not.*

Perhaps some of the more unlearned among the Greeks suppose that Paul wishes here to establish the myth of the heathens, which I know not from whence those men have learned to bring forward, deceived themselves and deceiving others. For, fabricating some sort of fate and fortune ^D according to their own pleasure, and then attributing power over our actions to these vain idols, they strip man of his chief ornament; that is, the ability to live freely and to have a complete and voluntary choice of the things he might wish to do. Now, by bringing the minds of men under necessity by means of their own doctrines and opinions, they harm common life in no small measure. For if anyone, as they themselves teach, should set out to commit illicit acts, since he cannot, even if he should happen to wish it, decline the nod of fate, no wise man would blame him, even if he were seen to be sinning. For what is

necessary and done against one’s will, if someone were found to have committed it, will surely be free from all blame and punishment; but on the other hand, no one would reasonably praise a pious and honorable man. For why should he be greatly praised if such a man did not exist by his own will, but was driven to this by the nod of another, or even compelled by the insuperable necessity of fate? It would be most absurd, therefore, to say that the teacher of the best doctrines was deluded by the sophistries of the pagans, or follows the folly of those whose mysteries he is the guardian of; indeed, when he says: “For what I work, I do not know; for what I will, that I do not, but what I hate, that I do.” But if anyone were to contend stubbornly, and preferred to believe that fate and fortune have power over our actions, why would he not rightly interrogate Paul, saying: If we are bound by harsh and inexorable necessities of things to be done or not done, and we have absolutely no dominion over ourselves, but rather yield to others who are more powerful, and use a coerced judgment, how have you written to us yourself: “Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives?” The law, therefore, has dominion in a certain way over the living; for it will be rendered void, as is fitting, regarding the dead; but it is ordained not for them, but for those who still tread the life in the body; and it crowns with praises those accustomed to succeed, but passes judgment on the profane. Then how will the lawgiver be a holy judge, punishing those who have sinned because they fell into this unwillingly, compelled by fate? Or rather, why did he even establish the law at all? For to those who have the power to do whatever they might wish, the law ordains just punishment if, when it was possible to succeed by setting their mind to good works, they themselves have honored baser things, and have exchanged what is condemned by the law for better things; but to those, however, who have the yoke of necessity hanging over them, and who are always turned about according to the will of those who rule over them, I consider that the law was established in vain. In fact, why would it not be truly said that even the omniscient Divinity would not have imposed upon us the yoke of the law, which justly and deservedly defines what is pleasing to Himself and directs toward useful duty, if He had known that we were caught in the snares of fate? Either, therefore, let those of the contrary opinion say that this was unknown to God—or, if they choose to think rightly and shrink away from this detestable opinion of divine ignorance, they must also clearly confess that the law was truly established by Him and that punishments were also decreed by Him for sinners.

God surely knows well that man, living with free will, is able to direct his actions by spontaneous movements as he pleases, with no one hindering. For this reason, the divine Paul also says that the law has dominion over man as long as he lives. He does not say this as if the mind of man were subject to the will of others; but he speaks acutely and wisely, and examines the passions of human nature, unfolding the infirmities of the soul in detail, and with the innate pleasure.

^A For although he himself was crucified to the world, and the world to him, and he was indeed truly worthy of admiration, yet he wisely judged that he should not look only to his own grace, but should take as the subject for his discourse the infirmity of those who had not yet reached his own condition. When, therefore, you hear him saying, "For that which I work, I know not," think of certain most grievous sinners who imagine that they are living a most excellent life, and that there is nothing that can equal the delights and vanities of this world. These men pursue pious ways with the utmost hatred, and they exult and revel exceedingly in their own pleasures. Of these, I think, Paul says somewhere: "Who mind earthly things, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame." These men might rightly say, as if performing some highly commendable act while committing iniquity: "For that which I work, I know not." Therefore, let them hear: "Awake, ye that are drunk, with your wine." For just as those who are heavy drinkers and intoxicated, having been deprived by their vice of the accuracy of a sound mind, do not even know what they themselves are doing at the time of their drunkenness, so those who have become infirm in their minds from love of the flesh and the most disgraceful pleasures would not even know what it is they are doing. ^B Paul, therefore, explains to us this disease of the human heart by saying: "For that which I work, I know not." But if there were someone whose heart was somewhat more sensitive to the reproaches of conscience, and who grieved while he was sinning, yet was still overcome by the pleasures of sin and advanced to sinning almost against his will, he might fittingly say: "For not what I will, that I do, but what I hate, that I do." How many and how often do they admire continence, and indeed even enter upon this way of life, but are afterwards overcome by the goads of detestable pleasure, their mind slipping into vice; they commit sin, and are filled at the same time with sorrow! To these in particular, who are sick almost against their will, it befits to say again: "Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me."

^C VII, 16. *But if that which I will not, I do, I consent to the law, that it is good.*

The sharpness of his consideration turns again to the nature of the body, and he contemplates the power of the natural passions inherent in it. For both the desires that impel one toward any passion whatsoever, and the sins of a life of pleasure, have the flesh as their fountainhead. The disciple of the Savior confirms this for us, saying: "Whence are wars and contentions among you? Are they not hence, from your concupiscences, which war in your members?"

VII, 18. *For to will, is present with me; but to accomplish that which is good, I find not.*

"To will," he says, "is present with me; but to accomplish that which is good, ^D [is not]," and the rest. In order to demonstrate [the]

^A that the flesh is justly accused of suffering sin within itself in a terrible manner, he wisely admits that while the good is present with us, the power to perform it is not; for the mind is forced toward an involuntary fall and against its own desire. Therefore, as far as its own purpose is concerned, it would be outside of sin; but because it endures a force that is hardly to be escaped, the blame seems to lie not so much with the mind itself as with the one who is prevailing. Therefore he says: "But if I do what I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me."

VII, 21. "I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me."

^B Observe again how wisely and skillfully [(Cod. f. 92.)] he accepts the law, not as having the power to blunt the goad of sin, nor as being able to put to death the sin within us, but only as instilling into the mind the knowledge of what is beneficial. For if, he says, evil is present with me, as dwelling in the flesh and debasing it, the law indeed provides help and, as it were, gives counsel, yet it does not free one from sin. But to those who are held by the infirmity of sin, it is not enough to know what they ought to do, because they need strength to perform the things that are right and pleasing to the law. Just as, indeed, for those who wish to excel in battle, the mere and naked knowledge of tactics is ^C not sufficient for this purpose, but if to this there be added vigor, only then would such men become illustrious and notable. If, therefore, the law teaches what is well-wrought in good deeds, but in no way aids those who are overcome by weakening sin, it is good as a teacher, yet it would not rightly be reckoned as having the same grace as that which is through Christ, which is both able to supply sound judgment and makes us stronger than evil.

VII, 22. "For I delight in the law of God after the inward man."

As I have already said, the mind thirsts for that which is free and longs to be delivered from those things that are reproached; and it crowns the law with the highest honors as the ^D guide to the best things. But the nature of the flesh is forced toward improper pleasures, while the law of sin wars and dwells within. By "the law of sin," he refers to the innate impulse and whatever one might think to be the passion of loving the flesh, just as indeed he also called "the law of the mind" its inclination and will toward the good.

VII, 25. "So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."

[(Cod. f. 96.)] A long discourse has been fashioned by him, examining minutely each of the things in us, and the

^A modes of desire which the human mind is accustomed to endure when evil opposes it. He asserts, however, that the mind is sometimes sluggish toward the good on account of the tyranny of carnal passions, while at the same time it becomes sorrowful and ashamed of its own fragility; and that it is altogether unable to cast off the burden of involuntary sin, since pleasure presses upon it vehemently; and that for this reason it is weak to resist, with the law aiding it not at all in this. Truly, therefore, the divine Paul says that, with the mind, he obeys the divine law, but with the flesh, the law of sin. And this, I think, is what he meant when he said, "To will lies close to me, but to perform what is good, does not." Formerly, therefore, as I said, we had the resolve, as far as pertained to the will of the mind, to obey the divine law; but the flesh drove us toward sin, as if setting up its own will in opposition. Consequently, those who wished to do what was right fell into condemnation, being hindered by the tyranny of the passions. But through Christ the condemnation has ceased—that is, the overmastering power of carnal impulses. ^B Indeed, even those who were able, by being tyrannized by the passions, to complete the things of the fleshly impulses, are now, through Christ, no longer prone to such things.

VIII, 2. *For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus.*

(Cod. f. 96 b.) I deem it necessary, for the sake of an accurate declaration of the meanings contained herein, to say this: just as he calls carnal affection—which leads us to every kind of vice—the law of sin and death, so too he calls the spiritual will—that is, the inclination of the mind toward doing right—the law of the spirit of life. But *he who sows to the flesh will from the flesh reap corruption; he who sows to the spirit will from the spirit reap eternal life.* Therefore, the law of the spirit of life—that is, the will of the mind that leads toward life—was formerly in us as well; for we served the law of God with the mind. But the weak part of us, as I said, labored in resisting, and the human being, overcome by the desires of the flesh, fell into the ^C condemnation of the law. But once the disease was cast off, he was strengthened through Christ: for we were sealed through Him by the Holy Spirit, and clothed with power from on high; and thus we were redeemed, and no longer further subjugated to evil, and, as I said, restored to a free dignity. Therefore, the law of the spirit of life—that is, the will of the mind tending toward good works and life—after it has obtained grace through Christ, and has cast off its ancient infirmity, then, I say, this law of the spirit, despising the malice of sin and constituting itself superior to the law of the flesh, "has set me free," he says. Yet, this law itself did not grant freedom entirely, but it procured it for us through the merits of Christ. Just as, therefore, it is altogether necessary for those who are under the law of sin to be entangled also in the snares of death; so too, it is fitting that those who are not under it at all, ^D but have been vindicated into freedom through Christ, should in turn be outside the jurisdiction of death, and should show themselves to be superior to corruption, and lead a life in holiness.

^A

(Cod. f. 98 b.)

Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans

By what manner the sin within us is put to death, let us say, as far as we can. For the Word of God, by the good pleasure of God the Father, has appeared in the likeness of sinful flesh, that he might judge sin in the flesh. For he became man, having brought himself down to the emptying of himself. And that it is of like form and of like nature to those...

^A of our bodies, who could doubt? Nevertheless, while the bodies of all other men may be called "flesh of sin," because they naturally sicken from the wellspring of absurd desires, no one would dare call Christ’s body "flesh of sin"—God forbid!—but rather the "likeness of the flesh of sin." It is indeed similar to our bodies, yet not so constituted that it could be sickened by carnal uncleanness; for that Temple was holy even from the womb. And as far as natural thoughts and reasonings go, certainly no one would hesitate to assert that, inasmuch as it was flesh, it did not have its own innate and inborn impulses. But because the Word, who sanctifies the whole creation, dwelt in it, the power of sin was condemned, so that the strength of this benefit might pass over to us as well. We have partaken of him not only spiritually, ^B but also corporally, just as he was transformed—for when Christ dwells within us through the Holy Spirit and the mystical blessing, then indeed the law of sin is entirely condemned within us. It is true, therefore, that what was impossible for the law, in that it was weak because of the flesh, has been brought to an end through Christ, who condemned and destroyed sin in the flesh, so that the justice of the law might be fulfilled in us. For the justice of the law—that is, the power of the decrees of the law, the will striving toward virtue—was fulfilled when our internal law was no longer, as I have said, undermined in any way by the tyranny of innate desires. Therefore, the justice of the law is fulfilled in us, if we no longer walk according to the flesh but prefer to live spiritually.

VIII, 6. *For the mind of the flesh is death: but the mind of the spirit is life and peace.*

He very rightly gives the mind of the flesh the title of death, and calls the mind of the spirit life and peace. For the love of the flesh truly generates death, whereas by those who prefer to live spiritually, eternal life and heavenly goods are acquired. ^C

VIII, 11. *But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you.*

Our Lord Jesus Christ was raised from the dead by the Father, life having entered into his flesh through the Holy Spirit, which is his own. For that he himself vivified his own temple, he declares to the Jews, saying: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." Therefore, even if he is said to have been raised by the Father, he nonetheless raised up himself through the Holy Spirit. For all divine works are done by the Father through the Son in the Spirit. Christ, therefore, will raise our bodies also from the dead. ^D

VIII, 17. If we suffer with him, that we may also be glorified together.

8, 19. For the expectation of the creature waits for the revelation of the sons of God.

VIII, 20. Vanitati enim creatura subjecta est.

^A it awaits in a certain way the revelation, as I have said, of the sons of God.

VIII, 23. *Not only [it], but even we ourselves, having the firstfruits of the Spirit, we also groan within ourselves.*

He takes for the demonstration of what has been said that which is wont to happen within us. For we ourselves, he says, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan, being burdened, awaiting adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. For it is true that a corruptible body weighs down the soul, and the earthy tabernacle presses down the mind full of many cares. But once the Spirit has leaped into us and transforms us unto a desire for virtue, the love of the flesh, which has settled into our members as an external law, immediately opposes us and, being ever sharpened toward absurd pleasures, rises up against us relentlessly. For this reason we groan for the redemption of our body, reckoning this as adoption. For we do not desire the laying aside of our bodies, nor do we deem this worthy of the name of redemption; but we await a spiritual body to be brought into being, one which, naturally, casts off all carnal and earthy affection and the goad of sin. Such is the body we call spiritual. And if the grace of adoption effects the redemption of our body, let no one find here an opportunity to slander the resurrection, nor let anyone arrive at such a point of impiety as to say that the flesh will be dispersed and utterly annihilated ^B after it has fallen into the earth, and that in its place will rise again something else, spiritual, extremely subtle, and ethereal. For this is how those people understand the term "spiritual."

VIII, 24. *For in hope we were saved.*

We believe that our bodies also will overcome corruption and death. But this is laid up for us in hopes, not as being already present, but as something that will most certainly occur in every way and altogether; and we await it, bearing up patiently, that we may attain so venerable a gift.

VIII, 26. *Likewise also the Spirit helps our infirmities, etc. But the Spirit himself makes intercession for us with groanings inexpressible.*

*With groanings inexpressible* He makes intercession for us, namely, our spirit. For we groan at times ^C when we strive to offer supplications to God. But we learn even this through the Holy Spirit’s teaching, for He is as wise as the Son. ^D

^A But since he says: “We do not know what to pray for as we ought,” let us examine this: although we have already been instructed by Christ as to what we ought to pray for, when He clearly said: “Thus therefore pray ye: Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth,” and what follows these; since, therefore, we have learned in what manner it is fitting to offer supplications, what could be the meaning of the apostolic letters, or what could the voice of Paul be looking toward? We say, therefore, that we do indeed pray, seeking the request of good things, and above all others, those things that are for the glory of God, and those things by which one might be able to live rightly and truly accomplish a praiseworthy life. But having the first fruits of the Spirit, we ourselves also groan within ourselves, awaiting adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. And certainly, in this respect, we do not know what we should pray for as we ought. For if “the eye has not seen, nor the ear heard, neither has it ascended into the heart of man, the things which God has prepared for those who love him,” what shall we ask for when we approach in prayer? Or how could we know or see them—or rather, the things that go beyond the mind and are not known to the hearts of men? And what could the redemption of the body be, or what is the transformation, or how it is changed into incorruption and glory, the Maker of these things alone knows. The disciple of the Savior once said to some who were ignorant of how they ought to pray: “You ask and do not receive, because you ask perversely, that you may spend it in your pleasures.” It is fitting, therefore, and with the best of reasons, for those who are in this state to say: “We do not know what we should pray for as we ought.”

^B We ask, therefore, in the Spirit with ineffable groanings for those things which we believe will be, but of which we are entirely ignorant in what manner they will be. Our nature, he says, is weak, and as far as it is concerned, it disbelieves that it will ever live again; yet great and divine things are promised to us, such that they cannot be grasped, nor did they ever come up into the heart of man. Nevertheless, for faith in such great things, we have no small help from the Spirit. For these things are greater than prayer [can reach], and we do not know how it is fitting to pray for them. As if the Apostle were saying: those things which are above human mind and above prayer, these the grace of the Spirit given to us works for us in an ineffable way, and the first fruits give us confidence regarding the whole. For just as the wedding pledges, which those being married give to one another, guarantee what comes after, and, being produced, they compel the fulfillment of the contract for the sake of which they were given; so, I suppose, the first fruits of the Spirit, that is, the partial gift of the Spirit, which is the pledge of our inheritance, confirms to us the grace to be given in its own time in its totality. Therefore, it is necessary to not shirk the labors required to obtain it. The word “to intercede,” properly,

^A metaphorically, is said, since we are also accustomed to raise our hands in mutual meetings.

VIII, 28. "We know that for those who love God, all things work together for good, to those who are called according to purpose." ^B All things do indeed work together for good for those who love God, those who are called according to purpose. But whose purpose is this? And what might be understood by "according to purpose"? Therefore, "according to purpose" would be "according to will." Are those who are the subject of our discourse called, then, according to the will of some—whether of the one who calls, or even of those themselves who are called? Surely, every impulse which leads us toward righteousness would come to us from God and the Father. ^C For Christ says somewhere: "No one can come to me, unless the Father who sent me draws him." Nevertheless, in these matters, one would not be wronging the truth by saying that some have become called according to purpose, both that of the one who calls and that of their own.

VIII, 30. "And those whom he predestined, those he also called; and those whom he called, those he also justified; and those whom he justified, those he also glorified."

It is fitting that some, deceived by their own ignorance, should have offered a specious pretext for their unbelief, saying: "If those whom God foreknew according to purpose and choice are the ones called, it is nothing to us who have not yet believed; for we have not been called, nor have we been predestined." ^D To these we reply that the one who made the wedding feast for his son sent his servants to gather the invited, but they did not wish to come; and in their place came those who were called according to their own particular purpose, and thus the bridal chamber was filled with guests. Therefore, it appears that no obstacle was laid in the way even of the former, if they had wished to approach; nor does foreknowledge do injustice to anyone, nor, conversely, does it benefit some. Otherwise, let them demonstrate that they themselves were not foreknown—they who have insulted the God who calls them by their own unbelief. But even some were indeed called and rushed into the wedding, yet they did not become the elect, nor were they justified, nor were they honored. For what reason, you ask? Because they were not wearing the garment suitable for the wedding. Besides, we find our Lord Jesus Christ himself speaking openly: "Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest." Behold, he already called all to himself; and no one would lack the grace of the calling; for by saying "all," he excludes no one. Those whom he knew from afar, he says, what sort they would be, them he predestined to participate in the future goods, and them he called, so that through the...

faith in Him they might obtain justification and no longer sin. But glory, for those who have once and for all become partakers in incorruption and immortality, he has bestowed upon all these things. By these words, "We know that for those who love God all things work together for good," ^B the Apostle wishes to teach that God by no means neglects His elect while He allows them to be tested by present calamities. For how could that be? Since he called them to the enjoyment of such great goods, not now, but long ago and from the very beginning, from the time when He knew by His ineffable foreknowledge what sort they would be, even before they were born. For knowing from above that they would be such, he prepared for them from afar goods proportional to his disposition toward them. How then is it possible that he should overlook those for whom, even before their power of choice existed, he had prepared rewards, and for these reasons had called them? So that through faith in Him, for those who have chosen to do good, all things work together, with God acting as their defender. For he who did not spare His own Son by nature, that He might save those in danger and deliver them from perils, how shall He not also with Him freely give us all things?

Veritatem dico in Christo, non mentior, testimonium mihi perhibente conscientia mea.

(Cod. f. 125.) God at the beginning made Israel His own choice, and indeed He even called him His firstborn; but they became arrogant and insolent, and, what is more, they became the slayers of the Lord. For this reason they have perished; for they have become cast off and cast out, and having fallen away entirely from their intimacy with God, they have been placed behind the nations; and they have appeared even as strangers to the hope of their fathers. ^C But since the blessed Paul was appointed a minister of the divine Gospels, and preached Jesus to the nations, saying everywhere and in all places that those who are of the blood of Israel had fallen from grace, while asserting that those who were once buried in darkness and were worshippers of demons had now been called according to the purpose and foreknowledge of God—lest any of the more ignorant should think that he was, so to speak, insulting his own kinsmen who were lying prostrate, and mocking those who had fallen, he offers a necessary defense, and says: "Veritatem dico in Christo, non mentior," and the rest. But for those who have wandered into such perversity of ways as to fall away from the love of God, and who in consequence have had to endure severe punishments, it would be a matter for any man to feel sadness; and to shed a tear for them out of brotherly love is not contrary to reason, but rather denotes supreme charity. ^D Yet truly, to wish to be anathema from Christ for them—that, indeed, exceeds every measure of love. For no one who is in his right mind would choose, for the sake of the salvation of others, to offend God, and while disregarding his own life, to seek to procure the profit of others. Why then, what does he say concerning the salvation of the Jews, what compensation...

does he set before his own ^A? It is, therefore, a hyperbolic statement, and a proof of the most perfect charity. For "I could wish," he says, "that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brothers"; for it is as if he were to say: If, by my incurring the offense of Christ, Israel is saved, I would certainly wish it; I myself (who also said to those justified by faith: "For I decided to know nothing among you, except Jesus Christ, and him crucified," and who proclaimed openly to all: "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or the sword?")—I myself, I say, would clearly wish to undergo such a great evil, and to go to destruction alone on behalf of all. But indeed, he speaks in such a way that he might draw the Jews to apply themselves to faith, and turn aside the slanders of the foolish. For some of the Jews were imagining that divine Paul, as if insane, was opposing the Mosaic laws. Hence he also wrote to those who believe: "For whether we are beside ourselves, it is to God; or whether we are of sound mind, it is for you." Therefore, he says, I would indeed wish, and very eagerly, in order to save those of my own blood, to be anathema from Christ. He adds, however, as if showing a suitable cause for his grief on their behalf—wherefore he had come to such a decision of mind, and that it might not appear something harsh and absurd while he says he wishes to spend his own life for the life of others—he adds, I say: "First of all," he says, "they are Israelites, whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service, and the promises; and from them also is Christ according to the flesh." Certainly, if the law of Moses had not been a witness of our relationship with God, or for those few who not long ago had known the true God by his own nature; if the Jews had not sprouted from the root of the holy Fathers, and had been heirs of their nobility; if they themselves had not been the first to have pursued the modes of worshipping God, and had received the hope of the promises; certainly, one would be permitted to entertain a much lesser anxiety concerning them. Now, since their fathers, and the rest of the commonwealth, after a not unsuccessful course, had collapsed into an unexpected end, and had fallen away from their hope, why should he not be truly grieved who had fallen into such calamitous circumstances?

IX, 6. But it is not possible that the word of God should have failed.

He speaks precisely: for he says that it is least of all possible for the word of God to be false, that is, to be able to stray from the truth. ^D For God, the God of all, promised clearly to Abraham from the beginning of the world that he would be the father of many. And again: "Multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the multitude of the stars in heaven." It was necessary, therefore, that Abraham be shown to be the father not only of the Israelites (for the nation that came from him was but one), but of countless peoples throughout the whole world, who are likewise reckoned as sons of Abraham, if they indeed are of the promise, and walk

and stand in the footsteps of his faith, according to what is written. For as the blessed Paul himself says somewhere: “Not through the law was the promise given to Abraham, that he should be the heir of the world, but through the righteousness of faith; for if they who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is made of no effect.” Since, therefore, the seed of Abraham is reckoned as in Isaac, that is, according to the promise (for these were the words of the promise: “At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son”), it is evident that it would not follow that all children of the flesh are in every way and altogether to be reckoned as children of God; rather, those should have the glory of this privilege who are of the promise, ^B that is, those who are to be such through faith.

“Not only so, but also Rebecca, having conceived by one, even by our father Isaac.” IX, 10. It must be known that the sense of the discourse here is not perfect, but rather suspended and in need of some brief addition; that is, something must be understood so that it may not appear to limp. The matter is as follows: The Apostle had previously demonstrated that because Isaac was given to Abraham by promise, it does not follow that all the children of the flesh are to be reckoned to him as seed, but that it is more fitting that he be called the father of those who are children by faith and promise. Then he comes to Rebecca and the events concerning her, ^C and says: “Not only so,” that is, “my argument does not stop merely at the birth of Isaac, but Rebecca also, having conceived by one, even by our father Isaac.” And it was necessary to add this; it would perhaps have been included for the sake of proof and confirmation, that is, it would serve as a pattern and image of the calling and grace given through election and foreknowledge. For with some such word added, his subsequent discourse would then have seemed to flow fully. But I know not how, having omitted that, he passed immediately to the remaining things which were said and done concerning the birth of those from Isaac.

IX, 14-24. “What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid!” ^D and so on, until: “And he called us, not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles.” Since it was likely that some of those who are prone to calumny would believe that Jacob and Esau had obtained the inclination of their wills without scrutiny, and that the one had been loved by a peculiar grace, while the other had been hated, the Apostle, forestalling this injurious opinion concerning the divine decrees, necessarily attempts to defend his own words, lest they appear to contradict one another, thus in some way rising up against them. For if, he says, even before the children had done anything, and before any experience or deeds of their own, the one was deemed worthy of love, and the other was hated,

and ordered to serve the lesser, perhaps God is unjust. But how is this not a foolish thing to say? For if the good man Jacob had not come to be, and if Esau had not been wicked, one might reasonably say that the foreknowledge was perhaps mistaken, and that what was determined for both came to be the result of a random impulse and uncertain desires. But since Esau was very depraved ^A and Jacob was wise, the foreknowledge of God does no injury at all, granting beforehand—even before the time—to the good man the habits by which he would obtain the love of God, and allowing the other, who was not of this sort, to bring condemnation upon himself. For it was not difficult for God to show patience and wait for the time of their deeds, so that each of them might be distinguished by his own works. But because it was necessary to represent in a preliminary type the mystery of the grace given by election and of the gift ^B given by foreknowledge, for this reason the excellent Artificer of such things, God, in a way seized the occasion and, right from the birth of these children, demonstrated that Isaac—as though he alone descended from Abraham—would be the father of innumerable nations, who were to be called by promise and as if by faith. But if, again, God shows mercy as God to those whom He chooses according to knowledge—or rather, to those to whom it is reasonable that showing mercy is fitting (for He once said to Moses: “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I ^C have compassion”)—how will this matter not be beyond any calumny? But the Apostle, I believe, clearly foreseeing that some would perhaps think that it is by divine nods that some are good and others disobedient, necessarily brings forward himself the objections arising from their ignorance, and says: “It is not of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.” For if Esau was hated even before he had done any evil, and Jacob was honored before he was brought into being, and yet He shows mercy on whom He shows mercy; how is it not ^D then worth considering whether it is of no avail for one to run or to will—that is, for one who is eager to do some good—and whether all our affairs depend upon the nods of God? Then he heaps up the things that can strengthen this opinion, and says: “For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: ‘For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you.’” He then adds to these what is as it were the conclusion of the whole problem, saying: “So then He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.”

You will say to me, therefore: Why does He still blame man? For who has ever resisted His will? What, I ask, remains as a method of defending divine providence? The question is certainly obscure, and one which might seem to favor their objections. Nevertheless, although it is sufficient for our defense in this matter that nothing is done by God outside of justice and right—for He distributes to each what is fitting for him—there is a method of apology for it; although it is very difficult and seems perhaps even to bolster the problems raised by those men. Yet it is sufficient for understanding that nothing would ever happen outside of the reason that is fitting from God; for He distributes to each what is fitting for him.

(1) It is again intimated that predestination is after foreseen, and manifests the doctrine: Foreknowing those who were going to love Him, He predestined, etc.

He succors and has mercy on those to whom it is fitting that mercy should be shown, ^A but he subjects the wicked to penalties, not with the punishment following immediately and at the heels of their transgressions, but rather with a long-suffering patience preceding it, such that some might even come to think that God is unconcerned with affairs on earth. Paul therefore confronts them and stands in opposition to those who talk in this way, directing the force of his argument toward the persons brought forward as examples, I mean Esau and Pharaoh. ^B He speaks, then, toward each of those named: "O man, who are you to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, 'Why did you make me thus?'" He makes it clear by an evident example that it is very perilous to criticize divine judgments. For if anyone should choose to think reasonably, he will certainly leave the judgment of individual things to God, who knows all things, in whatever way He Himself knows to be appropriate; he will not doubt in any way that whatever He chooses to do is holy, molding things according to His authority as He chances to. Therefore, he vehemently blames those who apply a scrutinizing mind in any way to divine promptings, examining whether they are right or not. For he says ^C they ought rather to imitate the workmanship in the hand of the potter and with silence endure the work of God. "For the thing molded will not say to its molder, 'Why did you make me thus?'" But perhaps some may say, even in regard to this: "If God, like a potter, molds things according to whatever way He wishes, so that He makes one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor, how does this not persuade one to think entirely and in every way that each and every person is such as he has been divinely formed to be? So that one is born unto dishonor and has been allotted such a nature, and another is formed, or rather raised up, hard-hearted, in order that, as He Himself says, 'His name might be declared ^D throughout all the earth.'" What complaint, then, does the Scripture still have against sinners? For they have been made for this purpose.

Against such things one might say that, for one thing, they could not say that the power of these thoughts indicates to us differences of natures in these cases; for He did not say that some were made crude and hardened, or into vessels of honor and dishonor, nor did He assign such a nature to them at all. Rather, it persuades one to think that some are molded just like pottery vessels, some unto honor and some unto dishonor. And the manner of the example is taught to us from prophetic words. According to what manner, then, are some molded, just like pottery, some unto honor and some unto dishonor, and for what causes, one might know by consulting the words of Jeremiah. It is written thus: "Arise, and go down to the house of the potter, and there you shall hear my words. And I went down to the potter's house, and behold, he was doing work upon the stones; and it fell, the vessel which he was making, in his hands; and he made it again another vessel, as it pleased before him to make it. And it came to pass, he says, the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 'If as the potter...'"

^A I shall not be able to do to you, O house of Israel? Behold, as the clay is in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hands. I will speak at last concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I may pluck them up; and that nation shall turn from all their evils; and I will repent of the evils that I thought to do unto them. And I will speak at last concerning a nation and a kingdom, that they may be built up and planted; and they shall do evil before me, so as not to hear my voice, and I will repent of the good things which I spoke to do unto them.' Do you see in what manner some are formed for honor, and others for ignominy? Not because they have obtained by lot a nature created in this way, but because they each receive the equal and fitting recompense for their own works. And indeed, if the Creator of all things punishes the man who turns away from upright works to foul ones, and in turn crowns with honors him who passes from foul things to good ones, how is it not true to say that some have by no means become base by nature, or are formed for their own sake, but rather have become as vessels of ignominy because, although they had chosen once to live a life upright before God, they have through voluntary weakness turned toward things that are worse?

^B At, however, someone will say, God himself hardened the heart of Pharaoh; and indeed he also said to him: 'For this very purpose I raised you up, that I might show my power in you.' Come then, if God hardens some and himself raises them up as vessels of wrath, which are said to have been fashioned for destruction, why does he still find fault? For who has resisted his will? But how could he who is hardened by him be good? What then should I be able to answer to these things? It suffices for the cognition of the truth, if we consider and believe, that God could never be the author of any base thing; for all things whatsoever he has made are very good. If, then, they maintain that the Egyptian was not a man, and prove that he did not share in the same nature as we, we also will hold our peace. But if he was like us, and the divine oracle clearly declares that it does not do evil, neither is it so, or, if they shudder at this, let them confess that the things brought into existence by him are good. For in this way they will repel that most petulant judgment. But the words, 'For this very purpose I raised you up,' spoken to Pharaoh, denote ^C not 'I created' or 'I formed,' but rather 'I called' him to the will of resisting me, and not from the beginning of his birth, but at the time when Moses was sent to deliver Israel. And for what things, or for what reason, the all-wise Paul will make clear to us: 'For wishing,' he says, 'God to show his wrath,' and the rest. ^D

^A The whole earth had been in error in the times prior to this; for some worshipped the creation, while others fashioned a religion according to their own desire. Abraham was eventually called to the knowledge of God, and thus there grew from him a race devoted to the worship of God. But since they themselves also went down into Egypt, and then spent long periods of time there, they slipped into error and worshipped the gods of the inhabitants. But God remembered the things He had promised to the fathers; and Moses was chosen for the mission, that he might deliver Israel from servitude. But it was necessary for those who had been called to the worship under Him, and for all peoples throughout the earth, not only to be persuaded that the God of the Hebrews had been manifested after a long passage of time, but also to be confirmed by exceedingly great miracles in the faith and glory concerning ^B Him—that He is not, like other gods, speechless and powerless; but rather that He Himself steers the whole universe, and that His wrath strikes down those who oppose His commands. But it was necessary, again, for God, wishing to perform wonders, to appear fittingly as He approached this. Pharaoh was therefore raised up for resistance in the economy of salvation, and he was hardened against the divine power; and for this reason he was not unjustly punished, for he was an impious man and an idolater, and he used to maltreat Israel with mud and the making of bricks, and he imposed upon them toil in place of wages. Therefore he was necessarily termed a vessel of wrath, and he had been fitted for destruction, that is, he had driven himself to such a state of wickedness that he became at last a vessel of wrath and destruction. God made use of this man for the demonstration of the power that was in Him, so that His name might be proclaimed in all the earth, and so that he might be seen to suffer things ^C of which he was worthy to suffer; so that the suffering was owed because of his first sins, and even if he had not caused offense by his second ones. Therefore, let every blame and babbling against God be dissolved; for wishing to demonstrate His wrath and to make known His power, He bore with great patience the vessels of wrath which had been fitted for destruction, that He might benefit the vessels of mercy, that is, those who have been shown mercy through faith. For we have been called not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles.

*Moses indeed writes of the justice that is from the law, etc.*

*Moses writes of the justice that is from the law, he says: "The man who has done these things shall live by them."* But there was no one at all who was able to accomplish it blamelessly. *"For who shall understand his transgressions?"* The grace that justifies is therefore better, and it delivers us from the writing that is in the law.

*But the justice that is from faith, etc.*

It is helpfully defined, and as it would come to pass towards ^D our faith, if it might have the blamelessness before God, and that which has been made exceedingly well...

For to doubt at all and to be tossed about ^A in the weakness of the mind, and to waver of one's own accord, is a thing altogether to be detested. It seems also superfluous and most dangerous if anyone should think it necessary to scrutinize those things which are both ineffable and surpass our understanding. For how could those things which God has wrought by an ineffable plan be made manifest? Furthermore, who is the one whose eye of the heart is so great as to be able to look upon God? Or rather, who will understand, even if someone should choose to speak and recount those things which are far and away beyond us? For our Lord Jesus Christ, when once conversing with Nicodemus concerning spiritual regeneration, was saying: "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless one be born anew from above, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Then He also added the things that follow there. But when Nicodemus understood nothing at all, then indeed, then Christ, showing that the dullness of the human mind is far removed from the subtlety of understanding, says: "If I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe, how ^B will you believe if I tell you of heavenly things?" He added to these: "Amen, amen, I say to you, that we speak what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, and no one receives our testimony." Therefore, those things that are higher than us are inscrutable. For if it is truly said that even those things which are in our hands are with difficulty comprehended by us, as it is written, why is it not necessary to think that in those things which surpass our reasoning, faith is a most useful thing, with no examination accompanying it, and no vain searching applied? For in these matters, prudence is the chief ornament. ^C

X, 11. *Everyone who believes in Him will not be put to shame*, etc.

Let not Israel consider salvation through faith to be a good peculiar to itself alone; for everyone, says the Scripture, who calls upon the name of the Lord, will be saved, whether Jew or Gentile, whether slave or free. God, the God of all, saves impartially; for all things belong to Him. Thus we say that all things are gathered together in Christ.

XI, 1-3. *Has God rejected His people? Far from it.*

Wisely does Paul, although Israel is suffering from blindness, nevertheless not allow it to be ^D more severely hardened.

^A He passes over to gentle words, having hitherto accused Israel as if they were obstinate, yet he does not deprive them of the hope that comes from above, nor does he say that they are entirely thrust out from intimacy with God. He provides clear proof of this matter, setting himself forward as an example, being an Israelite and of the seed of Abraham, most fittingly still calling them God's people, and adding the phrase "Far from it" to those words regarding rejection. These things were done by him as if he were soothing those who had chosen to be disobedient, and by flattering them, he leads them on and brings them into a pious and submissive state of mind. If, therefore, it is evident that he was called to the apostolate, and was made a priest of the Savior's mysteries, a herald and apostle to the Gentiles, even though he was from Israel, it is manifest that God has not rejected His people. ^B *11, 2. Do you not know what the Scripture says in the case of Elijah?* Most opportunely, as a kind of image of the things that have now befallen Israel, he brings forward the history of the times of Elijah. For it is easy to perceive from the comparison of those ancient deeds how Israel has wantonly acted against himself. For when Ahab, king of Samaria, was reigning, Israel was absurdly worshipping things cut by hands; there were sacrifices and shrines everywhere. All those who were attached to God were in great fear, and were being oppressed by an intolerable persecution, so that the prophets were hiding in caves and rocky chasms, and Elijah himself, when he had retreated into the deep desert, was imploring God, saying: *“They have torn down your altars, they have killed your prophets, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.”* ^C But he heard a response to this immediately: *“I have left for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.”* But just as at that time God was by no means driving Israel to such impious crimes, but they rather slipped into it by their own madness, so now, when God the Father has offered salvation to all through Christ, and has rejected absolutely no one, they have slipped voluntarily toward apostasy, having pushed away the Redeemer. Therefore God has not rejected His people, for He has offered, as I said, the participation in the salvation given through Christ, if they should indeed choose it.

*11, 6. But if by grace, it is no longer by works, etc.* ^D *“But if by grace,”* he says, *“it is no longer by works; otherwise grace is no longer grace.”* Where, he says, someone thinks he can earn something by his works, there the name and the value of grace will be entirely superfluous and vain. For to the one who works, Scripture says, the reward is reckoned not by grace, but by debt. Therefore, if grace arises from works, it is no longer grace.

*11, 7. What then? Israel has not obtained that which he seeks.* He had said that God did not reject his people.

But since it was likely that some would rise up against this and object, saying: "How then did God not reject his people, if Israel has fallen—even if not entirely and completely, yet at least in part? For a remnant has been saved, and this according to election." ^B He meets this again very prudently, and says: "What then?" which is to say, "What do I say in response to these things? That which Israel seeks, he has not obtained, but the election has obtained it; and the rest were blinded." For Israel was seeking justification by the Law; and how, he says, could he be justified, since no one is perfected by the Law? So Israel was seeking justification in shadow/type, but did not obtain it; but those who were singled out beyond the others, because of their faith, obtained it, having been justified, clearly, through faith. The rest were blinded, that is, they were hard and unteachable.

XI, 9. And David says: Let their table be a snare, etc.

"Let their table," he says, "be a snare," and the rest. For their table—that is, their inhospitality and cruelty—rightly and deservedly became accursed, which they exercised against Christ when he was lifted up on the cross; for to him, when he was thirsty, they offered vinegar mixed with gall.

XI, 11. *I say then: Have they so stumbled that they should fall? God forbid!* etc.

I admire your kindness, O divine Paul, who arrange the words of the divine dispensation so excellently! ^C For you argue that the Gentiles were not called for this reason, that the Israelites might lose all hope toward God, after they had stumbled against Christ as against a certain stone; but rather that, by envying those who had been unexpectedly received, they might unlearn their shameful ways, desire to think better thoughts than before, and thus welcome the Redeemer. It pleases me to confirm the matter with a brief example. It sometimes happens that small, young children experience griefs appropriate to their age; and then, having run a little way from their father or mother, they shed tears from their eyes quite openly. They distress their parents not a little, as natural love for their children dictates. ^D Yet, to cleverly call them back from that bitterness and silliness, they grab some other child who happens to be nearby, and bestow their gifts upon him, thus exciting emulation and, as it were, provoking them toward returning and toward affection for themselves. As I suppose, the divine Paul says that God has now acted in a similar way, so he might not permit one to despair of Israel, though they have sinned.

XI, 12. *And if their fall is the riches of the world.*

For if, he says, the world has obtained intimacy with God because of the offense of Israel, and because they lack a good mind, the Gentiles have been taken up, what now

could their reception be, if not a snatching away from death, and life from the dead? ^A

*If by any means I may provoke to emulation my own flesh.* (Rom. 11, 14) By this he again calls Israel his own flesh, that is, his own kinship according to the flesh. As if he were saying: I state that my apostolate is glorious, of great value, ^B and most dear to God, and exceedingly useful to all those who dwell under the sun; and I do not say this so that I may seem to adorn my own head with vain honors and incongruous pomps, but that I might save my own kinship according to the flesh. He is, as it were, pricking them with the sting of zeal, and stirring them up so that they might choose to be justified through the grace of Christ.

*Until the fullness of the Gentiles should enter, and so all Israel shall be saved.* (Rom. 11, 25) Observe and consider this point again. For he says that the fullness of the Gentiles will enter, and all Israel will be saved. ^C But if anyone were to choose to say to this: Although many of the Gentiles have died in unbelief, how then has the fullness of the Gentiles entered? And further, not all Israel will be saved, if it is true that the Jews will receive the son of iniquity, having scorned the love for Christ. For He Himself said this: *I have come in the name of My Father, and you do not receive Me; if another shall come in his own name, him you will receive.* (John 5, 43) And the most wise Paul says: *Because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved, for this reason God sends upon them a working of error, that they might believe in the lie.* (II Thess. 2, 10-11) ^D What, then, shall we say to this? We say that while God has offered the grace through faith to all liberally, and has excluded absolutely no one, why would the fullness of the Gentiles not have entered, at least as far as it concerns the intention and goal of Him who calls? For we shall not find the affirmation of Holy Scripture to be false just because some have voluntarily slipped and missed the gift; for though they could have possessed the goods offered once and for all, they made a voluntary apostasy instead. Therefore, as far as the kindness and philanthropy of the Caller is concerned, the fullness of the Gentiles has entered, and all Israel has likewise been saved: but since they have remained unyielding, he says that, on this account, *blindness in part has happened to them.*

*As it is written: There shall come out of Sion the deliverer.* (Rom. 11, 26) That the cast-off Israel is also destined to be saved in due time, he confirms the hope of this by putting forward a sacred oracle. For Israel will indeed be saved at the proper time, being called in the final place after the calling of the Gentiles.

*For just as you also at one time did not believe in God, etc.* (Rom. 11, 30) He shows that both were in the same guilt,

^A and healed by one and the same grace, both the Gentiles and ^B Israel. For Israel was called in due time through Moses and was delivered from the affliction in Egypt; but the worshipers of demons—namely, the Gentiles, as understood through the Egyptians—did not yet believe in the mercy shown to the people of Israel; for they did not believe the signs and wonders performed through Moses, nor did they wish to recognize the God of the Hebrews. Yet the congregation of the Jews was with difficulty sent forth to sacrifice in the desert, while they themselves held fast to their ancient error. But now, in turn, they have obtained mercy, while Israel has fallen into disobedience, having refused to believe in the mercy given to the Gentiles; yet in such a way that he himself will also obtain mercy in due time. The guilt of both, therefore, as I have said, is equal, as both are equally in need of the help of the One who shows mercy. He says that God has shut up all in disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. And we do not imagine that it is a work of the divine will that some should disobey, so that they might obtain mercy when they have fallen into this—rather, He has shut them up in disobedience, showing them to be guilty of the charge of disobedience, and, as it were, convicted by their very own deeds, so that they have arrived at such wretchedness that they have need only of being pitied and shown mercy. ^C XIV, 6. *He who eats, eats to the Lord, and gives thanks to God.* The matter here does not concern the most serious things. For the question is whether this person or that acts for God's sake, and whether both give thanks. If, therefore, what is sought is the giving of thanks, then he who eats meat—not he who Judaizes—is the one who truly gives thanks, he who takes for himself the liberty to eat meat, and not he who still clings to the Law. XIV, 14. *I know and am confident in the Lord Jesus, etc.* ^D *I know and am confident,* he says, *in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is common* (1) *through Him,* and the rest. The witness is worthy of faith, affirming that he knows and is confident; and he adds, *in the Lord Jesus,* so as to strengthen the truth all the more, and to gain the faith of his hearers without any doubt. Moreover, he is mindful of what was said long ago by Christ: *Not that which enters into the mouth defiles a man; and that every food goes into the belly, and is cast out into the draught.* For this is the condition of foodstuffs. Wherefore, as far as their nature is concerned, nothing of those things which serve for nourishment is profane or contaminated; for they are sanctified by the word of God and prayer. But we also remember that when God was creating all things: *He saw,* says the Scripture, *that they were very good, and He blessed them.* Since, therefore, God has approved with praise the things created by Him, who would dare to say that defilement and contamination proceed from them, without at the same time accusing the Creator? Therefore absolutely nothing

^A in created things is profane. But if anyone perhaps happens to think that something is profane, he himself rather labors under defilement in his own mind. For all things are clean; but the unbeliever is defiled by his own weak faith in certain things, not by those things which he himself has judged to be profane. For just as to those perfect in mind there is one God by nature, and no other besides Him, and no idol is believed to be in the world, and what is offered to idols is reckoned as nothing—for he who does not recognize an idol, how could he consider as having weight that which is offered to idols?—to those, truly, who think there are many gods, there will certainly be something that is also offered to idols. Thus, to those who have believed that the things from God are undefiled and clean, there is absolutely nothing profane by nature. And the use of foods is certainly left as a matter of liberty. But to those who have not yet been brought to this judgment, they are not yet clean according to what they correctly think, but are held to be profane, because their mind limps toward the truth.

XV, 7. *Therefore receive one another, just as Christ also received you to the glory of God.*

We are many, one body, and members one of another, as it is written, with Christ binding us into unity by the bonds of charity. ^B *For He is the one who made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of partition, having abolished the law of commandments in ordinances.* It behooves us, therefore, all to think the same thing toward one another; and if one member suffers anything, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is glorified, all the members rejoice. ^C *Therefore receive,* he says, *one another, just as Christ also received you to the glory of God.* We shall receive one another, if we determine to think the same things, bearing also one another’s burdens, and keeping the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Thus God also received us in Christ. For He is truthful who said that God so loved the world that He gave His own Son for us. For He was given as a ransom for the life of us all, and we have been translated from death, and have been redeemed from death and sin. And he clarifies the scope of the dispensation, saying that Christ was made a minister of the circumcision for the truth, and the rest. For because God had promised ^D to the fathers of the Jews that He would bless the seed that was to come from them, and would multiply it like the stars of the heaven, therefore He appeared in the flesh, and became man, who was God and the Word Himself, who preserves the entire created order, and as God bestows well-being upon the things that exist. He came, however, into this world with flesh, not to be ministered unto, as He Himself says, but to minister, and to give His soul a ransom for many. Indeed, He confessed that He had clearly come to fulfill the promise to Israel. For He said: *I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.* Wherefore, not mendaciously